[bbfoto]

  It seems that iBasso said they don't support ID3 tags, I could be wrong. I will ask them. 

  Of course the DX90 utilizes ID3 tagging. I asked iBasso about a few situations where it wasn't working for all tags and they said that any bugs, which frankly happen in most any FW with any product I have ever had, will be fixed so that all of ID3 works well. 
 

 

 
 
This isn't something that should need to be fixed in the first place, but since it is, the question is WHEN will it be completely fixed, and will it be "borked" again when we do the next firmware update?
 
 

  Couldn't agree more.
 
As a programmer, I wouldn't ever release code that works this ****ty.

 
Completely agree as well.  Again...how many Player apps are currently in the Android/Google Play Store that handle ID3 tags without issue?
 
Guys, if we just accept this crappy firmware and UI and don't complain, nothing will ever be improved.  That's true in all aspects of life.  (Though after witnessing the DX50 debacle, I'm losing faith that anything will be completely "fixed" even with our complaints and suggestions!)    If you like living in mediocrity with a half-@ssed DAP, that's your choice, but the Squeaky Wheel Gets the Oil!  (And unfortunately sometimes gets banned or shunned for posting valid issues).  In all honesty, there is no acceptable reason that this DAP's UI and firmware should be "squeaky" in the first place.
 
Guys, the reason that I am so frustrated is that I know what this DAP could, and should, be.  The sound quality is absolutely phenominal, but (for me) this device is very frustrating to use.  And yes, I do use Folder/Directory View & Selection...but should I be forced to in order for it to work properly?
 
Here are just a few of the issues. Some of you may or may not be affected by these.  These are my "Impressions" of the DX90 as of May 24, 2014.
 
 
...
 
 
 
1.  Random Sound Dropouts and Fade in, 2 second cut-off at the end of tracks, and 1 second cut-off at the beginning. (Listening to the new Head-Fi/Dr. Chesky's Ultimate Headphone Demonstration Disc, the anouncer is partly cut-off when he begins to speak at the beginning of those tracks).  How can you enjoy your music this way?!?

 
2. Lackluster Playlist Support (read my previous post).
 
3.  Faulty Library Scanning.  (My mSD cards and files work flawlessly in all the other devices that I use).
 
4.  Terrible Readability of the Display due to the poor choice of the Typeface or Font that's used, and the text-to-background contrast (or lack thereof. Read my prevous post. IMO Black Text on a White Background would be better).

 
5.  ID3 tag support/implementation. (Again, this has been a standard for more than a decade).
 
6.  No search function. (When you have the capabilty to store and play THOUSANDS of files, this is a must, IMHO).
 
7.  Changes in Sound Signature with Firmware updates. (Not a problem if we are able to choose which SS we prefer to use, while also using the latest Firmware.
 
8.  The on-screen "Back" and "Home" buttons should be placed at the Bottom left and right of the screen for UI consistency.
 
9.  When viewing the "music info", the text should be able to be scrolled in order to see it completely.
 
10.  There is no automatic Scrolling of Track/Artist/Album information on the home screen.  This would be nice.
 
So even though I could afford it, I really don't feel that I should have to spend AK240-type money just to get a GOOD UI and UX.  As previously mentioned, there are heaps of inexpensive Android phones that are 100x better in the UI aspect.  IMO, (AK240) is just stupid money for this type of device, and that money is much better spent feeding, clothing, educating, and housing the less fortunate in the world.
 
Just my $1.02  ...call me Negative Nancy if you will...

 

[nc8000]

Those are obviously valid points for you but certainly dont apply to everybody.

I find the font and display to be fine, only thing I would like was a track number out of total tracks displayed.

I have never experienced the cut of problem but have 3 times had the cut out and fade in problem, but replaying the same track nothing is wrong.

Scanning of my 6 sd cards has posed no problem what so ever and the id3 tracks that form the database works fine (there were some non us characters that displayed in asian in 2.0.0 but I have not sern that on 2.0.5).

Search function and playlist have no value for me, I browse the database and play one album at a time from end to end.

So for me the current fw is very near perfect.

 

[Marleybob217]

   
 
This isn't something that should need to be fixed in the first place, but since it is, the question is WHEN will it be completely fixed, and will it be "borked" again when we do the next firmware update?
 
 
 
Completely agree as well.  Again...how many Player apps are currently in the Android/Google Play Store that handle ID3 tags without issue?
 
Guys, if we just accept this crappy firmware and UI and don't complain, nothing will ever be improved.  That's true in all aspects of life.  (Though after witnessing the DX50 debacle, I'm losing faith that anything will be completely "fixed" even with our complaints and suggestions!)    If you like living in mediocrity with a half-@ssed DAP, that's your choice, but the Squeaky Wheel Gets the Oil!  (And unfortunately sometimes gets banned or shunned for posting valid issues).  In all honesty, there is no acceptable reason that this DAP's UI and firmware should be "squeaky" in the first place.
 
Guys, the reason that I am so frustrated is that I know what this DAP could, and should, be.  The sound quality is absolutely phenominal, but (for me) this device is very frustrating to use.  And yes, I do use Folder/Directory View & Selection...but should I be forced to in order for it to work properly?
 
 
Here are just a few of the issues. Some of you may or may not be affected by these.  (These are my "Impressions" of the DX90 as of May 24, 2014).
 
 
1.  Random Sound Dropouts and Fade in, 2 second cut-off at the end of tracks, and 1 second cut-off at the beginning. (Listening to the new Head-Fi/Dr. Chesky's Ultimate Headphone Demonstration Disc, the anouncer is partly cut-off when he begins to speak at the beginning of those tracks).  How can you enjoy your music this way?!?

 
2. Lackluster Playlist Support (read my previous post).
 
3.  Faulty Library Scanning.  (My mSD cards and files work flawlessly in all the other devices that I use).
 
4.  Terrible Readability of the Display due to the poor choice of the Typeface or Font that's used, and the text-to-background contrast (or lack thereof. Read my prevous post. IMO Black Text on a White Background would be better).

 
5.  ID3 tag support/implementation. (Again, this has been a standard for more than a decade).
 
6.  No search function. (When you have the capabilty to store and play THOUSANDS of files, this is a must, IMHO).
 
Even though I could afford it, I really don't feel that I should have to spend AK240-type money just to get a GOOD UI and UX.  IMO, that is just stupid money for this type of device, and that money is much better spent feeding, clothing, educating, and housing the less fortunate in the world.
 
Just my $1.02  ...call me Negative Nancy if you will...

 
You're right. I have this android app called N7, it's a crazy good music app, and works almost flawless. It does so much and it only cost me like €1.50.
As the ibasso is based on linux, it shouldn't be hard to program for. 
 
Then again, I can imagine that ibasso has spent a crazy amount of time and money researching and developping the hardware. Since this player is very reasonably priced, I understand that they just lacked the money to come up with good programmers.
 
That said, and coming from the hisoundaudio rocoo p: the ibasso DX50 (not sure how much worse the firmware is on the DX90) really works well enough. Truly, the things that I needed it to do worked absolutely fine. 

 

[jamato8]

I have 18 cards, with all types of music and formats and they all work. I have many different daps and have used many different systems over the years. Frankly for me, the UI of the DX90 is intuitive and easy to use. The sound is excellent and such a huge step up from what we got a few years ago and with inflation factored in and the cost of some other daps compared to the DX90, with the sound of the DX90 being right up there with them, it is a bargain. I have no problem with the UI. I also shoot professionally using Leica and Canon and not one camera has been released from these companies, with Canon having a much greater financial stance than Leica, that did not need FW updates. The same for Microsoft and Apple computers. So that there are some basics for some that don't work when using the DX90, well this has happened with all the before mentioned companies and continues to happen. There are so many possibilities and variables within programing and interactions, that I accept it as not a perfect world. FW updates from Canon take much longer than what happens with iBasso and often the problem is far more dire in that it can affect something that you have to present to a client and the image got messed up because of something that was wrong in the FW. 
 
I spend plenty of time listening to the music, and glad I do and I am glad it is so much more an enjoyable experience than just a couple of years ago. 

 

[bbfoto]

Those are obviously valid points for you but certainly dont apply to everybody.

I find the font and display to be fine, only thing I would like was a track number out of total tracks displayed.

I have never experienced the cut of problem but have 3 times had the cut out and fade in problem, but replaying the same track nothing is wrong.

Scanning of my 6 sd cards has posed no problem what so ever and the id3 tracks that form the database works fine (there were some non us characters that displayed in asian in 2.0.0 but I have not sern that on 2.0.5).

Search function and playlist have no value for me, I browse the database and play one album at a time from end to end.

So for me the current fw is very near perfect.

 
I can appreciate that.  We all use our DAPs in different ways and have different perspectives.
 
I would also like a display of the "track#/#total tracks".
 
I'm an advertising photographer and use my DAPs on set for music.  Some days I am photographing little kids for Target, some days teenagers, some days middle age or elderly for pharmaceutical companies, some days other musical artists or celebrities (who can be very particular with their musical tastes)...so it's really important for me to have solid Playlist support and QUICK & EASY navigation.
 
Of course, in that scenario the ToTL Sound Quality is not nearly as important, so I will continue to use the iPod Classic or iPT, Galaxy Note II/III, etc.  But it would be nice to have just one high-quality playback device that can do it all, with ToTL SQ as well.
 
When I'm listening on my own, I also like to listen to entire albums, but still the drop-outs and cut-offs are annoying, especially on live, classical, or other "continuous"/gapless albums.  I guess we'll see what happens with the next firmware update.  

 
 
.

 

[bbfoto]

  I have 18 cards, with all types of music and formats and they all work. I have many different daps and have used many different systems over the years. Frankly for me, the UI of the DX90 is intuitive and easy to use. The sound is excellent and such a huge step up from what we got a few years ago and with inflation factored in and the cost of some other daps compared to the DX90, with the sound of the DX90 being right up there with them, it is a bargain. I have no problem with the UI. I also shoot professionally using Leica and Canon and not one camera has been released from these companies, with Canon having a much greater financial stance than Leica, that did not need FW updates. The same for Microsoft and Apple computers. So that there are some basics for some that don't work when using the DX90, well this has happened with all the before mentioned companies and continues to happen. There are so many possibilities and variables within programing and interactions, that I accept it as not a perfect world. FW updates from Canon take much longer than what happens with iBasso and often the problem is far more dire in that it can affect something that you have to present to a client and the image got messed up because of something that was wrong in the FW. 
 
I spend plenty of time listening to the music, and glad I do and I am glad it is so much more an enjoyable experience than just a couple of years ago. 

 
It's just me then.
 
John. I think the latest ToTL dSLR's are QUITE A BIT more complex compared to this DAP.     Yes, of course their will always need to be FW updates, but in regards to my Canon, Nikon, and Hasselblad/PhaseOne camera systems, the FW updates were always to add features...they all worked perfectly "right out of the box".  And I've never had a dSLR FW update bork other features or create NEW major issues.  
 
I agree that the DX90 is a FANTASTIC value based on SQ alone!  But honestly, in this day and age the UI and UX should be leaps and bounds better.
 
I guess I'll have to give Rockbox a shot when it's available for the DX90.  Even though I'm guilty of owning plenty of hi-res music, I don't think there is any sonic advantage (for playback/listening purposes) over Lossless 16/44, and I'll come back to post a link to the AES white paper that proves why this is so.  (I don't want to start a Sound Science debate here, just stating for context).

 

[jamato8]

   
It's just me then.
 
John. I think the latest ToTL dSLR's are QUITE A BIT more complex compared to this DAP.     Yes, of course their will always need to be FW updates, but in regards to my Canon, Nikon, and Hasselblad/PhaseOne camera systems, the FW updates were always to add features...they all worked perfectly "right out of the box".  And I've never had a dSLR FW update bork other features or create NEW major issues.  
 
I agree that the DX90 is a FANTASTIC value based on SQ alone!  But honestly, in this day and age the UI and UX should be leaps and bounds better.
 
I guess I'll have to give Rockbox a shot when it's available for the DX90.  Even though I'm guilty of owning plenty of hi-res music, I don't think there is any sonic advantage (for playback/listening purposes) over Lossless 16/44, and I'll come back to post a link to the AES white paper that proves why this is so.  (I don't want to start a Sound Science debate here, just stating for context).

Not to derail but since we are talking about FW updates there is no way any camera and Canon in particular that was perfect out of the box. Go on the boards to read the FW updates dealing with issues. No, not one camera do I have that did not require a FW update to deal with an issue both in use and for improvements. I don't feel like naming the issues but go on the Fred Miranda site for Canon and you can find them for the most expensive cameras Canon puts out. Leica on the Rangefinder forum. Nope, I do not agree with you that it was only for enhanced usability and have direct experience with this, having to deal with issues when I have assignments in remote areas of the world and then doing workarounds until the issues dealt with in a fW update. 
 
------------------------
 
To add to the impressions forum, using the coax out of the DX90 to the Hugo is a great experience. I am using the Whiplash special coax and it does work and have some great sound. 

 

[musicheaven]

   
It's just me then.
 
John. I think the latest ToTL dSLR's are QUITE A BIT more complex compared to this DAP.     Yes, of course their will always need to be FW updates, but in regards to my Canon, Nikon, and Hasselblad/PhaseOne camera systems, the FW updates were always to add features...they all worked perfectly "right out of the box".  And I've never had a dSLR FW update bork other features or create NEW major issues.  
 
I agree that the DX90 is a FANTASTIC value based on SQ alone!  But honestly, in this day and age the UI and UX should be leaps and bounds better.
 
I guess I'll have to give Rockbox a shot when it's available for the DX90.  Even though I'm guilty of owning plenty of hi-res music, I don't think there is any sonic advantage (for playback/listening purposes) over Lossless 16/44, and I'll come back to post a link to the AES white paper that proves why this is so.  (I don't want to start a Sound Science debate here, just stating for context).

 
 

  Not to derail but since we are talking about FW updates there is no way any camera and Canon in particular that was perfect out of the box. Go on the boards to read the FW updates dealing with issues. No, not one camera do I have that did not require a FW update to deal with an issue both in use and for improvements. I don't feel like naming the issues but go on the Fred Miranda site for Canon and you can find them for the most expensive cameras Canon puts out. Leica on the Rangefinder forum. Nope, I do not agree with you that it was only for enhanced usability and have direct experience with this, having to deal with issues when I have assignments in remote areas of the world and then doing workarounds until the issues dealt with in a fW update. 
 
------------------------
 
To add to the impressions forum, using the coax out of the DX90 to the Hugo is a great experience. I am using the Whiplash special coax and it does work and have some great sound. 

 
 
I side with bbfoto, the DX50 was interesting initially, fun helping iBasso fix their bugs and infuriating at the end because of all those sq changes and then to make peace at the very end (1.2.8) with a version which you were able to say at last.
 
The problem with the firmware is it breaks all of rules of bug fixing; introduces new bugs, does not fix current bugs and changes working functionality. Being in that business, you won't survive that long if you keep delivering one bad software update after another. All of the tenets of software engineering seemed to have been broken. It goes without saying that they have to perform regression testing and that alone should not make your current software (firmware as well) behave differently, functionality wise, compared to the prior version except of course for the fixes and any announced modified or new functionality. One thing that I have to give credits where they are due, Fiio has instituted a bug/feature capturing activity. At least this way you know what is and specially what won't be added to the next coming firmware. Then they advertise their change logs on their site in black and white. iBasso should do the same and allow us to file bugs and they should take ownership of those, duplicate the bugs, agree on what they would fix, let us know and deliver the goods. This is how software engineering works, it has for decades and still does, at the least the ones who don't want to do it in a hap hazard way.
 
What's more unexcusable is that the DX90 and DX50 case wise and to some extent buttons operations are identical, switch the back plate and you could be fooled, obviously until you turn it on. So energy should have also been spent in making all functionality promised available on the first release. Maybe then if this would have been done right, there might not been a need for firmware upgrade in the first place (I am an optimistic so maybe it's wishful thinking).
 
Anyway I think you got the idea. I just don't appreciate making excuses for things that don't deserve it.

 

[jamato8]

I am not going to side with anyone. I state what I have a history of and what I expect. I have never found iBasso to lie about what they are trying to do. Not always does the fix come out on the next FW but they do seem to try. On the other hand iRiver, regarding my AK100 did lie and that I do resent. I asked over and over about gapless and a few other issues to be told they could and then couldn't do it but when the 120 came out they had gapless and it took a hack to have the FW for the 120 work on the 100 showing that all along, iRiver had the fix for the 100 but saved it for the 120. 
 
And time marches on and I am listening to and enjoying The Waterboys. Great stuff! 

 

[vkalia]

+1 to bbfoto and also to his very lucid explanation on WHY it is important to bring these issues up in public (aka squeaky wheel).
 
I respect that some people are happy with what they have - but my request to them is to not nay-say those of us who arent (which, to be fair, isnt happening on this thread - but is happening in spades in the thread of that Other DAP).   I am going to email iBasso - i've found their customer service to be a little more helpful & open to suggestions in troubleshooting than those of the Other Guys.

 

[highfell]

+1 to bbfoto and also to his very lucid explanation on WHY it is important to bring these issues up in public (aka squeaky wheel).

I respect that some people are happy with what they have - but my request to them is to not nay-say those of us who arent (which, to be fair, isnt happening on this thread - but is happening in spades in the thread of that Other DAP).   I am going to email iBasso - i've found their customer service to be a little more helpful & open to suggestions in troubleshooting than those of the Other Guys.

1. Focus on what is important. Sound quality & ability to play the many different audio formats and at the highest bitrate. The fact you can use it standalone or line out to a headphone or desktop amp and get stunning results without spending $1,000. That is why l was happy with both the DX50 & now the DX90.

2. If I look at what ITunes spat out it was a crock of sh$t., despite the billions of $ spent on its creation. The tags were a mess and very inconsistent. This makes reading them tricky.

3. It may be the fault of Gracenotes database but when I look at the Tags of a particular artist - for the same Artist, I get Rock, Progressive Rock, Classic Rock etc. , SO even if you have a OS that can resolve the different category tags, it is useless anyway because the tagging results are too inconsistent to make it worthwhile. It is the same with any database crap in = crap out.

4. So we come full circle and the answer is to tag your music consistently yourself and then the DX90 should be able to resolve them then. Problem solved

 

[vkalia]

1. Focus on what is important. Sound quality & ability to play the many different audio formats and at the highest bitrate. The fact you can use it standalone or line out to a headphone or desktop amp and get stunning results without spending $1,000. That is why l was happy with both the DX50 & now the DX90.

2. If I look at what ITunes spat out it was a crock of sh$t., despite the billions of $ spent on its creation. The tags were a mess and very inconsistent. This makes reading them tricky.

3. It may be the fault of Gracenotes database but when I look at the Tags of a particular artist - for the same Artist, I get Rock, Progressive Rock, Classic Rock etc. , SO even if you have a OS that can resolve the different category tags, it is useless anyway because the tagging results are too inconsistent to make it worthwhile. It is the same with any database crap in = crap out.

4. So we come full circle and the answer is to tag your music consistently yourself and then the DX90 should be able to resolve them then. Problem solved

 
I am focussing on what is important - the fact that it is different from what you consider important doesnt change that.  I consider the difference between DAPs, in terms of sound quality, to be very very minor under DBT conditions.    Usability is very important to me.
 
As for the "clean up your tags" - no, problem definitely NOT solved.   My ID3 tags are all cleaned up:
- Title
- Artist
- Album Artist
- Composer
- Genre
- Track #
- Photo
 
That's it.    The DX90 requires me to delete the Album Artist and Composer tags in order for it to work, and even then, sometimes it doesnt (and I have to do random things like rename the folder where it is getting stuck in order to fix this).   That's an incredible waste of time.   
 
Anyway, my preferences are not up for debate.  I am putting this out there so that (a) iBasso is aware of this squeaky wheel and (b) if anyone else cares about this feature, they are duly warned.
 
Happy listening!

 

[goodvibes]

You're certainly entitled to your own set of needs. For the record, I find the differences in DAPs rather important. It just nice that iBasso can make something for this price that is a consideration for both of us.
 
As fr FW, I never had another iBasso but I found both of the dx90 examples fine and the enhancements of the 2nd iteration welcome. I'm a folder view guy that doesn't use gapless, playlists or any other enhancements so I guess I'm easy to please form a usage standpoint. Doesn't mean that I can't appreciate others desire for more.

 

[depaor]

1. Focus on what is important. Sound quality & ability to play the many different audio formats and at the highest bitrate. The fact you can use it standalone or line out to a headphone or desktop amp and get stunning results without spending $1,000. That is why l was happy with both the DX50 & now the DX90.

2. If I look at what ITunes spat out it was a crock of sh$t., despite the billions of $ spent on its creation. The tags were a mess and very inconsistent. This makes reading them tricky.

3. It may be the fault of Gracenotes database but when I look at the Tags of a particular artist - for the same Artist, I get Rock, Progressive Rock, Classic Rock etc. , SO even if you have a OS that can resolve the different category tags, it is useless anyway because the tagging results are too inconsistent to make it worthwhile. It is the same with any database crap in = crap out.

4. So we come full circle and the answer is to tag your music consistently yourself and then the DX90 should be able to resolve them then. Problem solved

+1. The DX90 does everything I ask of it. Then again. my demands are simple. I want a high quality music player that will play my correctly tagged .flac files, has a good UI and put a smile on my face. For me, the DX90 has all of that. The fact that it came in at a reasonable price is all the better.
 
I have 875 abums with 11,576 tracks in total. It is a little unfortunate that none of my micro SD cards will individually hold that much, but that is not iBasso's fault. 264GB of music had to be distributed across my 64GB and 32GB cards. I'll get 128GB cards when they are avaialable to me at a reasonable price.

 

[bbfoto]

  +1. The DX90 does everything I ask of it. Then again. my demands are simple. I want a high quality music player that will play my correctly tagged .flac files, has a good UI and put a smile on my face. For me, the DX90 has all of that. The fact that it came in at a reasonable price is all the better.
 
I have 875 abums with 11,576 tracks in total. It is a little unfortunate that none of my micro SD cards will individually hold that much, but that is not iBasso's fault. 264GB of music had to be distributed across my 64GB and 32GB cards. I'll get 128GB cards when they are avaialable to me at a reasonable price.

 
That's great.  I can see why many people would be completely satisfied with the DX90 as it is. Its SQ is truly spectacular and it offers a fairly complete, although basic UI.
 
I guess I'm just way more demanding than most and I'm always looking at how things can be improved to be their best.  Maybe some people have become desensitized over time from their experience here with other "problematic" devices, but I try to look at each device from a "face-value" aspect and a fresh viewpoint.   And unfortunately, I'm still experiencing issues with even some of the most basic features and playback functions on the DX90.  

 
I've always been anal about correctly tagging my files as well...it's a huge pet peeve of mine. 

  Yes. Gracenote, FreeDB, and other tag DB's will more often than not bork your tags, so I've manually managed my tags for years, especially for any discs that I rip.  And I use various tagging software such as MP3TAG to manage all other files.
 
I also use a consistent file and folder naming scheme, as much a space permits, such as:
 
Artist_-_Album_-_Disc#-Track #_Track Name
 
e.g.  Cowboy_Junkies_-_Trinity_Session_-_01-06_Sweet_Jane.flac
 
 
With this nomenclature, each Artist's tracks are grouped together by Name and also Album, then by Disc # (for example, if it's a Boxed Set), then consecutive track #'s, and ending with the Track Name.


 
But I'm not willing to customize my tags in 1000's of files just to conform to iBasso's limitations, when my existing "clean" tags work properly in all the other varied devices that I use, from Mac & Windows computers with various playback software, to iDevices and Android devices. I admit to being an iTunes hater as well, but the UX & UI of the portable iDevices is dificult to match.
 
Regarding File Types, I do, however, use a mix of file types and bit depths/bit rates.  At the minimum my files are 320kbps CBR MP3's (unless a particular, desirable track is only available in a lower bit rate), with my preferred format being 16/44 FLAC as well, though I do have plenty of 16/44 ALAC, and higher-res WAV, FLAC, and DSF files in the mix.
 
FYI, if you converted all of your FLACs to MP3/320k you could very nearly fit your entire library on a single 128GB Micro-SD card.

 
Here's to future improvements and bug fixes for the DX90.  
 
​

​